I don't know about all y'all old people who, like, have kids and lived through the whole Elvis thing, but Elvis is a goofy icon to the rest of us and I know we'd never let any friend named "Elvis" live without some level of joking for the rest of our lives.

"Elvis" is larger than life - so large its bloated. Everyone's image is that fat figure in the white suit. It's a cartoon - endlessly parodied. That image overpowers the younger, virile Elvis with its fried-banana stench and lower-class America kitsch.

Bob Dylan has a veneer of artiness - the aura of an intellectual. He's not as embarrassing (critics would maintain otherwise) to as many people as Elvis.

But "Presley..." Now if I were a big Elvis fan, I'd consider that name. It's more subtle than ELVIS. Sounds vaguely upper-class.

Shake: That also provides the denial. We didn't actually name him after Bob Dylan. But if you use Elvis, there's just no getting around it. I mean, unless you're going to claim to be big Elvis Costello fans.

I once researched band name infringement cases because my band was being threatened with litigation by Kiss for doing a parody gig (where, by the way, we disclosed it was a parody tribute). I was the on band-stand lawyer and courtesy notary.

There's a great body of Elvis impersonator litigation, including the case of El Vez, the Mexican Elvis and the Colonel's failed attempt to protect the "Elvis Sneer."

So why is "Dylan" more popular now than in the 60s and 70s? I don't think more people are buying Dylan's music, and I don't think more people are buying Thomas's poetry. Are there really people a generation younger than Dylan naming their kids after him? As shake-and-bake said, "Dylan" just sounds cool (kinda). Bobby Z thought so. And Elvis was rare (and presumably dorky), even for southerners of The King's generation.

"...though nickname forms of Chuey or Jesse are usually used as replacements..."

Speaking of 'Jesse,' Elvis had a twin named Jesse who died in infancy. According to the wizard, the name 'Jesse' made a fairly strong comeback in the 80's but neither 'Elvis' nor 'Jesse' were very popular in 1935.

Crime may have something to do with that, at least in the case of Jesse.

Probably Jesse wasn't popular because it hadn't been all that long since Jesse James (and in 1935, the view most people held of a western outlaw was far less romantic and more despised than it is today.)

There was a significant decrease in the use of the name, 'Charles' in the 1960-1970's, with Charles Starkweather, Charles Whitman and Charles Manson together attaching the image of a psycho killer to the name. Prior to that time, it was a top name for boys, but since then, it has made at best a slow comeback (I don't think that Prince Charles has helped a great deal either).

Probably not an answer to this, but some of the psychology in naming children is in the Freakonomics book.

Also, while Jesus is very uncommon as a first name in the English speaking world, it is one of the most common first names for boys in the Roman Catholic Spanish speaking world (along with, of course, Maria, for girls).

So is it official that Florida is no longer part of the English speaking world?

Like someone mentioned, it's only a slice (albeit an important slice) of Florida that is billingual.

And the funny thing is, the Cuban-Americans are now starting to get touchy about being spoken to in Spanish.

The ones who were born and raised here use English as a kind of flag of disdain to their more recent Central American arrivals, in much the same way every immigrant group has looked down their nose to the ones who came behind them, in America.

While we're on this topic, why do Latino cultures name male children after Jesus, but other Christian cultures generally do not?

Partly wrong.

Hristo (Christ) is a very common Bulgarian name, to honour Jesus directly.

So is Riisto, in Finnish for the same reasons.

And as I mentioned, in France, de Jesus is common enough appellation, so "Latino" to mean Latin American, is the wrong word to use. In Italy, it is true Gesû is not a common name for a child, but it's not unheard of either.

When referencing Jesus as a name, then, you should say "Catholic", not Latino.

Having mentioned Hristo the Bulgarian name, I have to caveat this by saying it is all very regional.

In Serbia, e.g., using any part of our Lord's name is considered apostasy.

They too are mostly Eastern Orthodox, like Bulgarians.

I don't know the etymological curiosities of this naming practise, but I'll try to find out and post it later.

I can't believe I haven't yet been chastised for anti-Mexican and anti-white-trash stereotyping.

And Victoria, Ann is still Queen of all things SquismTM related, but you are quickly earning the title of Princess of SquismTM.

(amongst your duties, talk to school children about the dangers of squirrels, visit the orphanages where SquismTM is bottled, and wear a tiara fashioned from the tails of long departed squirrels of various species)

What's with all the Elvis-bashing? If the great unwashed like him he must suck! If only the working class had the good sense that their college-educated betters have, then they could name their offspring in honor of Bob Dylan's sophomoric taste in literature. Now that's classy!

And Victoria, Ann is still Queen of all things SquismTM related, but you are quickly earning the title of Princess of SquismTM.

I accept this honour on behalf of all the Althouse Squism minions.

(amongst your duties, talk to school children about the dangers of squirrels, visit the orphanages where SquismTM is bottled, and wear a tiara fashioned from the tails of long departed squirrels of various species)

Performing-artist is such a broad category and what constitutes greatness so debatable that it would be hard to be definitive without controversy.

I would discount both Sinatra and Elvis for not also writing and composing. To my mind to be one of the 'greatest' you need to embody all the qualities that make a great performer (from quality of voice all the way to cultural impact and overall artistic ability).

My personal top five would be Prince, George Clinton, Stevie Wonder, Bob Marley, and Ella Fitzgerald (she was the greatest singer/interpreter of all time, good enough to make me violate my rule about also being a writer/composer)

But Sinatra and Elvis are valid choices and their cultural impacts probably are greater than any of the artist I've listed.

(and see, not a single mention of SquismTM. . . . .until just then, I'll grow up some time before the middle of the century)

Victoria, interesting point about the Portuguese and the Bulgarians. One common thread among the the cultures of Spain, Portugal, and Bulgaria, where Jesus (or Christ) as a given name is seemingly most prevalent, is that they all experienced direct Muslim rule at one time. I wonder if that could be a cause? Perhaps it was a mark of Christian fidelity to name one's son directly after Jesus. Or alternatively, to the extent that the governing Muslim regimes maintained that Jesus was just another in a line of human prophets, perhaps naming a son after him did not seem that different from naming after any other human male in the Bible.

To those asking about "Jesus" as a name in certain cultures - one might ask the same of the common English names Christopher, Christian, Christine, Christina, and all of the various variations thereof.